The UN's Environmental Project

UNEP was established in response to a recommendation by the United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972. It describes
itself as "the environmental conscience of the U.N. system," formed "to
motivate and inspire, to raise the level of environmental action and awareness
at all levels of society worldwide." Based in Nairobi, Kenya, UNEP maintains
a professional staff of nearly 200 and has an estimated annual budget of
$30 million. Among its environmental services are: a Global Environment
Monitoring System (GEMS), a network of information on climate, atmosphere,
oceans, renewable resources and pollution; the Global Resources Information
Database (GRID), a system designed to provide information about the earth's
resources to planners and policy-makers; the International Register of
Potentially Toxic Chemicals (IRPTC) which provides policy-makers information
on potentially hazardous chemicals currently in use; and Infoterra which
provides governments and industries in 137 countries with technical data
about all aspects of the environment. UNEP gathers the data from more than
6,000 institutions and in over 1100 areas of environmental research.

Having
successfully put in force a treaty designed to limit the production and
use of Chloroflourocarbons (CFCs) and prevent further damage to the ozone
layer, the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) is confronting the
next major environmental challenge to the atmosphere: global warming. UNEP,
led by Executive Director Dr. Mostafa K. Tolba, is breaking new ground
in achieving international consensus on environmental issues.

In addition
to the ozone treaty, UNEP can boast of a number of significant accomplishments
since its establishment in 1972. For example, through multilateral negotiation
UNEP has developed the Med Plan, an intergovernmental effort to halt Mediterranean
Sea pollution, (1978-1980); 10 regional seas programs, modeled on the Med
Plan's example; the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species,
established to control trade in wildlife products; a Global Plan of Action
for Marine Mammals; and a plan for a Hazardous Waste Treaty, approved in
March of this year and likely to be implemented by mid-1990.

Among these
successes, the ozone treaty represents a unique convergence; those negotiations
included the public and private sectors as well as the scientific community
concerned about the potentially harmful effects of CFCs on the earth's
atmosphere. Addressing the U.N. General Assembly soon after the treaty
negotiations were concluded, U.N. Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar
said that for the first time, "the combined efforts of governments, scientists
and industry to prevent a global issue from reaching crisis proportions"
had led to a universally-supported international treaty.

Efforts leading
to the agreement can be traced to the 1970s, when several countries began
to restrict production and/or consumption of CFCs which are widely used
in refrigerants, styrofoam, cleansers and aerosol components. In March
1985, the European Economic Community and 21 countries, including the United
States, adopted in Vienna a Convention for the Protection of the Ozone
Layer which called on all parties to limit activities which could result
in depletion of the ozone layer and set general guidelines for cooperation
in legal, scientific and technical exchange. It set no specific numerical
limits on CFC production or use, however. In 1978, the United States banned
the use of CFCs in aerosols and in September 1987, the United States, the
EEC and 22 other countries signed a new preventative agreement: the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; at present a total
of 39 countries plus the EEC have signed and ratified it. The Montreal
Protocol calls for a freeze on CFC production and consumption at levels
not exceeding those of 1986, a 20 percent reduction of the 1986 levels
by 1993 and an additional 30 percent reduction by 1998.

Some environmental
groups are not sure that the reductions are enough to alleviate the problem.
According to Rod Fujita of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), "A lot
of evidence has come out recently that says that cutting CFC production
by 50 percent won't solve the problem. Representatives from the United
States and other countries say that we need to cut the emissions more than
that to solve the problem." Nevertheless, Fujita considers the Montreal
agreement a relative success.

Despite this success, environmentalists say
that UNEP operates at a disadvantage because of its financial dependence
on industrialized countries. "To date the organization has performed admirably
on a tight budget," says Jeff Leonard, of the World Wildlife Fund. But,
he adds "If the global environmental agenda continues to flower, UNEP will
also have to grow and/or change." Conrad Von Moltke, editor of International
Environmental Affairs, also points to the crippling effect of UNEP's small
budget. "UNEP's disabilities are linked to lack of resources.... Traditionally
its operating budget has been nothing short of indecent, with the United
States contribution to UNEP equalling about the same amount as EPA employees
spend each year on coffee."

With or without funding increases, UNEP is
moving to start work on new environmental treaties. Growing concern about
the greenhouse effect, along with the success of the ozone treaty, has
prompted UNEP to lay the foundation for an international agreement to prevent
further global warming. Tolba says that global warming is "one of the most
serious issues the world is facing." UNEP's Governing Council awarded the
issue top priority at its first special session in March 1988. And in May
1989, 103 countries attending the Governing Council decided to begin negotiations
for an international treaty on global warming and climate change in 1990.
UNEP, in close collaboration with the World Meteorological Organization,
will prepare a draft treaty, based, in large part, on the findings of UNEP's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Although both ozone depletion
and global warming affect the atmosphere, important differences between
the two issues may complicate negotiations toward a treaty on the latter.
Dr. Noel J. Brown, Director of UNEPs York Liaison Office, asserts that
"there is now considerable ferment in the world community to establish
a normative basis to protect our atmospheric resources and to stabilize
climate. The Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol have given us
a truly global framework for dealing with these global issues." But Dr.
Peter Haas, professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts
at Amherst and a specialist on global environmental affairs, explains some
of the potential complications, saying "It is difficult to generalize from
the ozone treaty to other cases [because] the scientific evidence on global
warming is not as solid and a much stronger opposition is mobilized against
developing a [global warming] treaty."

Perhaps the most fundamental barrier
to a global warming treaty is that, according to Haas, "effective treatment
of greenhouse gases would require a fundamental transformation of modern
industrial life." Brown also acknowledges this obstacle. "In attempting
to address the contributors to global warming, we are talking about the
centerpiece of industrialized civilization, which is energy use," he says.
And Leonard points out that the problem will soon spread beyond the industrialized
nations. He says that soon "developing countries may need to turn more
to the use of fossil fuels, a leading contributor to the greenhouse effect,
to offset their current problems of deforestation and soil erosion due
to overuse of wood."

The business community is making efforts to show its
interest in and attention to environmental issues through such measures
as creating a Global Climate Coalition with a mandate to communicate to
governments and communities business's concern about global warming. But
Dr. Irving Mintzer, a Senior Associate with the Climate, Energy and Pollution
Program of the World Institute in Washington, D.C., suggests that the actions
and commitments from the private sector are still very cautious and limited.

"We must proceed in a thoughtful manner, so that we don't destroy the economies
of the world," warns Mr. Tony Vogelsberg, Environmental Manager for Freon
Products (CFCs) at DuPont. DuPont, along with Pennwalt Corp., announced
a phase-out of CFC production over the next decade almost immediately after
scientists confirmed that ozone depletion is three times greater than originally
estimated. But Vogelsberg points out, "The ozone protocol affects a relatively
narrow segment of the industrial sector. Global warming, on the other hand,
involves so many players that it will be hard for any one industry to step
up to the plate and take the lead."

Environmentalists believe that the
deciding factor in the negotiations for the Montreal Protocol was the preponderance
of scientific evidence concerning the damage that CFCs cause, and that
the global warming treaty will have a considerably greater chance of success
if it too is based on a strong scientific foundation. Brown says "You cannot
base policy on ill-conceived data or data which has not been adequately
tested. Establishing a reliable scientific basis is one of the major tasks
of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change."

Perhaps the most unprecedented
aspect of the development of the Montreal Protocol was the active participation
of the private sector. UNEP hopes that participation will be maintained
throughout the negotiations on global warming. "As in the case with ozone,
the private sector has the research capabilities to develop alternatives
to using resources and products which exacerbate global warming," Brown
notes.

Mintzer calls the interaction between industry and UNEP "a new front,
a constructive approach." He says that "the most important aspect of the
ozone negotiations was the cooperation among industry, government and non-governmental
organizations."

Contrasting ozone with global warming, however, Mintzer
stated, "Industries ... don't yet have the message on global warming."
He believes that b y continuing to educate people and raise public awareness
about the problem, environmentalists will be able to change that. "New
risks, as well as new profit opportunities, will be generated as both concern
and research increase," he says.

Dialogue between UNEP and the private
sector is a relatively new phenomenon, although, as early as 1975, UNEP
created the Industry and Environment Office to serve as a liaison to industry.
Both UNEP and industry appear hopeful that the dialogue between the two
sectors will continue for some time. Dr. W. Ross Steveris, environmental
affairs manager of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. remarks, "I would
like to think of this interaction as a trend that will continue."

Haas
says that he believes industry will continue to respond to national polices
rather than becoming a moving force in developing environmental treaties.
To the extent that this is true, UNEP and other intergovernmental bodies
may face the difficult challenge of negotiating with an industry that wants
to appear environmentally conscious while still maintaining a high level
of resistance to substantive changes.

Stevens reveals DuPont's conception
of balancing environmental concerns with good business sense. "We believe
there will have to be a great deal of give and take for a number of sectors,"
he states. "The issue of atmospheric pollution is too tough to expect everyone
to be a winner and no one to be a loser. Hopefully, the final package will
be one where everyone believes he benefitted and no one feels he has lost
too much." Libby Bassett, a writer on population, environmental and development
issues for UNEP and other environmental organizations, expressed confidence
in UNEP's ability to handle the complex negotiations remarking, "UNEP has
a tradition of creating consensus in the face of difficult circumstances."
In Bassett's words, "Environmental language is one that can bring parties
in conflict to the table."

Nancy E. Wright is a former research associate for the
United Nations Association and a former consultant for the United Nations.